Neighbours At War, Assault With Intent To Injure Dismissed After Trial.

The Situation

Our client was charged with common assault following a neighbourhood altercation. The prosecution’s case relied on a complainant’s statement alleging intentional and aggressive actions during a dispute over residential space.

Our Defence Strategy

We identified key weaknesses in the prosecution’s evidence from the start. Our defence focused on:

1. Evidence Discrepancies: We obtained and analysed available CCTV footage, which contradicted central aspects of the complainant’s account regarding the manner and intent of the alleged incident.

2. Challenging Credibility: By comparing the complainant’s various accounts—from early notes to the formal statement—we highlighted inconsistencies that undermined the reliability of their narrative.

3. Providing Full Context: We presented the court with the broader context of the dispute, demonstrating it was a mutual confrontation rather than a one-sided assault.

The Result

At trial, we demonstrated that the prosecution could not prove our client’s actions met the criminal threshold for assault beyond reasonable doubt. The Judge agreed and dismissed the charge.

A charge does not mean a guilty verdict. With thorough preparation and strategic advocacy, a just dismissal is achievable.